Religion - the law - and commonsense !

An interesting case in a Wollongong court this week. A Sikh citizen faced a charge of riding while not wearing a safety helmet - and offence which attracts a $ 56 fine.
He claimed it was impossible to wear a safety helmet and a turban at the same time, and that his religion required that he wear the turban.

The magistrate found the offence proved, but dismissed the charge with a warning that he should seek exemption on religious grounds, otherwise there would be further conflict with the law.

It seems to be more a case of conflict between religion - the law - and commonsense !

A solution already exists. The " Patka " is a mini turban recognised by the Sikh religion as an adequate substitute for a full turban - and it allows both the turban and a safety helmet to be worn simultaneously.

Riding any type of two wheeled conveyance without a helmet endangers the safety of the rider, hence it could be argued that as no other person is put at risk that person is entitled to put religion before risk.

It's not that easy. There are many instances where a helmet is required to be worn. A combat soldier in the armed forces wears a helmet. A worker on a construction site is required to wear a safety helmet. A racing driver would be at incredible risk if driving without a helmet.

So it seems to be a matter of making a point rather than legitimately upholding a religious principle.

The way is clear - from both a religious and a legal point of view - to satisfy the requirements of both by combining a Patka and a helmet.

Now all that is required is for the third component - commonsense - to join the troika !